Writing about Hinduism is so difficult because each subject carries so much intellectual and emotional controversy with it; while Abrahamics seem to agree on about 90% of their doctrines all the time, Hindus have more to disagree on than to agree on and so this makes starting things almost nearly impossible. From what I understand from the term "Hindu Law", Hindu Law both exists in name and without any name previously. In Abrahamic holy books, the laws are set within the scriptures and are usually lists of dos and don'ts, everything is pretty straight forward. One way to describe Satya Yuga, the Hindu golden age is "rule of the gods", meaning we have all been perfected into godhood and we don't need any other rules other than our own desires because our desires are virtuous and harmonious with nature. As humans fell into spiritual and physical decline after the golden age, they became more prone to vice and unhealthy desires so manmade rules needed to be put in place, and the closer we get to the Kali Yuga dark age, the more rules and laws we need in order to function.
When the Samhita Vedas were written, it was closer to the golden age than any other holy book penned (the Vedas are the oldest) and so the Vedas really don't carry any commands but more present a lifestyle of the Vedic people which was closer to ideal so there was less need for explicit rules because the people were more implicitly noble and in tune with natural law. All things in Hinduism come from Brahman, the unknowable unmanifest "chaos" from which everything emanates, but these emanations which proceed forth follow the natural laws (Rta) of the universe. To align oneself harmoniously with the universe is called Dharma (right deeds) and from this, you will either reap positive or negative karma. The people of the Vedic age practiced better Dharma, better actions, because they were more innately connected to the Brahman essence and Rta natural law of the universe, they were more harmonious and synchronized so that they did not need much governance over them. That is why the Vedas are not a set of law books but a set of examples and ideas.
Now the Abrahamic holy books came much later, in the darker ages, when humans were less connected to the divine and so had to have their thoughts and actions strictly directed. The Old Testament of the Bible shows a people who must use extreme laws to keep themselves in order, thus Israeli society which is the basis of Christian and Muslim society, was very rule-oriented and came with many positive and negative commands. Because it is Kali Yuga, the religions which were formed within the Kali Yuga have an advantage because they are fine-tuned for the age, they speak to people's degraded nature and need for control and this is why they are preferred over the more free and liberal Vedas. Plus they have their rules all laid out for them, so they know what to do, what not to do, and how to define themselves, there is much less to speculation and personal preference, so they are able to implement their religions with relative ease in comparison to Hinduism.
But Hinduism also entered the darker age and so rishis did use exegesis on the Vedas in order to come up with rules, laws, and customs, however, thankfully, these are not as authoritative as the Samhita Vedas which are called Shruti, which is heard and unchanging, verse Smriti (law books), which means it is remembered and is mutable. Here are some examples of Hindu Law books which were created in later ages:
But Hinduism also entered the darker age and so rishis did use exegesis on the Vedas in order to come up with rules, laws, and customs, however, thankfully, these are not as authoritative as the Samhita Vedas which are called Shruti, which is heard and unchanging, verse Smriti (law books), which means it is remembered and is mutable. Here are some examples of Hindu Law books which were created in later ages:
The Laws of ManuGeorge Bühler, translator [1886]
(Sacred Books of the East, vol. 25)
Manu was the legendary first man, the Adam of the Hindus. This is a collection of laws attributed to Manu.
The Sacred Laws of the Âryas, Part I (SBE 2)George Bühler translator [1879]
(Sacred Books of the East, Vol. 2)
Hindu law books written by the sages Âpastamba and Gautama, in the first millenium B.C.
The Sacred Laws of the Âryas, Part II (SBE 14)George Bühler translator [1879]
(Sacred Books of the East, Vol. 14)
Hindu law books written by the sages Vasishtha and Baudhâyana, in the first millenium B.C.
The Institutes of Vishnu (SBE 7)Julius Jolly, translator [1880]
(Sacred Books of the East, Vol. 7)
This Hindu law book contains descriptions of yogic practises, and a moving hymn to the Goddess Prajapati.
The Minor Law Books (SBE 33)Julius Jolly, translator [1880]
(Sacred Books of the East, Vol. 33)
Later Hindu law books written by Narada and Brihaspati about 600 CE.
These Hindu Law books are often attacked by Leftists for carrying laws and ideas which are not agreeable in the modern age, but again, because Smrit is changeable, so are the laws found within these law books and these texts can serve as nothing more than a guide and example, each generation is allowed to update their own Smritis and law books. It should give Hindus no issue that these law books came later and are not set in stone, because both Jews and Muslims also you extrajudicial texts to formulate their current laws and regulations, even though these books may be the opinions or statements of only a Rabbi or Islamic scholar rather than a prophet; modern Jews and Muslims are allowed to use reasoning in order to make new laws and expand on laws.
Another good idea which comes from Jews and Muslims is that they attempt to establish and spread their laws wherever they go. In America, we have Jewish courts which have the legal binding of the United States and Israel, they are called Beth dins. Jews aquired the the ability to run their own religious courts in America because they applied an fought for it, and Muslims are attempting the same with their Sharia courts in both America and Europe, they want legal pluralism, because they want power, and eventual control over the society. While it is known that Muslim Sharia is applied nationally and rules over non-Muslim, it is not as well known that the eventual goal of Zionism is to accomplish the same thing, it is called Noahide Law and Jews have made many legal inroads in establishing these global Noahide Laws which reign over non-Jews in the US federal government, the United Nations, the Vatican and Israel (learn more here).
So how would Hindus begin the process of establishing their own Hindu courts in the USA and the West? Well first we would have to review our own law books to even get an idea of what we would be wanting to establish, so we would need societies to studying these texts and use exegesis to come up theoretical laws, and these debates and opinions would need to be recorded. Another step would be to follow the example of the Jews and set up Hindu Law advisory groups such as www.JLaw.com which would inform American courts and judges on Hindu Law and how these laws would theoretically apply to modern cases, its called submitting an amicus curiae brief. After getting some pratice, Hindus would need to petition the goverment to allow them to set up our own courts which would function on the Hindu Laws we have theorized and Hindu Law books, and like Jews and Muslims we would need to have our court's verdicts granted legal status in the US government. Why should Hindus do this? Because in this Kali Yuga we need to compete with the forces of Adharma, non-Hinduism, we are not supposed to sit and allow the enemies of the Vedas to gain all the power and to flourish. If your enemy picks up a sword their is no shame in imitating him and picking up a sword ourselves, plus Hindu courts are endemic to modern Hinduism, we should be doing this anyway. If Jews and Muslims are gaining influence in society by bringing their laws into secular government, Hindus should do the same and they should do it better, we should be doing it regardless, but yes it is a competition, be the winner or be the loser.
Another good idea which comes from Jews and Muslims is that they attempt to establish and spread their laws wherever they go. In America, we have Jewish courts which have the legal binding of the United States and Israel, they are called Beth dins. Jews aquired the the ability to run their own religious courts in America because they applied an fought for it, and Muslims are attempting the same with their Sharia courts in both America and Europe, they want legal pluralism, because they want power, and eventual control over the society. While it is known that Muslim Sharia is applied nationally and rules over non-Muslim, it is not as well known that the eventual goal of Zionism is to accomplish the same thing, it is called Noahide Law and Jews have made many legal inroads in establishing these global Noahide Laws which reign over non-Jews in the US federal government, the United Nations, the Vatican and Israel (learn more here).
So how would Hindus begin the process of establishing their own Hindu courts in the USA and the West? Well first we would have to review our own law books to even get an idea of what we would be wanting to establish, so we would need societies to studying these texts and use exegesis to come up theoretical laws, and these debates and opinions would need to be recorded. Another step would be to follow the example of the Jews and set up Hindu Law advisory groups such as www.JLaw.com which would inform American courts and judges on Hindu Law and how these laws would theoretically apply to modern cases, its called submitting an amicus curiae brief. After getting some pratice, Hindus would need to petition the goverment to allow them to set up our own courts which would function on the Hindu Laws we have theorized and Hindu Law books, and like Jews and Muslims we would need to have our court's verdicts granted legal status in the US government. Why should Hindus do this? Because in this Kali Yuga we need to compete with the forces of Adharma, non-Hinduism, we are not supposed to sit and allow the enemies of the Vedas to gain all the power and to flourish. If your enemy picks up a sword their is no shame in imitating him and picking up a sword ourselves, plus Hindu courts are endemic to modern Hinduism, we should be doing this anyway. If Jews and Muslims are gaining influence in society by bringing their laws into secular government, Hindus should do the same and they should do it better, we should be doing it regardless, but yes it is a competition, be the winner or be the loser.
